In February, the Legislature discussed putting a $9 billion school construction bond on the November ballot, saying many districts had major needs and that it was only appropriate for the state government to help out. Gov. Jerry Brown was quick to denounce the proposal, which eventually became Proposition 51. He said a first-come, first-serve approach helped wealthy districts with experienced staffs. “It’s a blunderbuss effort that promotes sprawl and squanders money that would be far better spent in low-income communities,” Brown declared.

Soon after, this editorial page agreed with Brown’s objections and added our own: The school bond process in California needs broad, fundamental reform. Rules against using 30-year borrowing for short-term needs have been eroded by school boards desperate to make ends meet.

There’s also the emergence of what might be called the bond-industry complex — companies which package and market bonds to districts and sometimes even handle financial details. This is a shady and dubious practice. It creates an internal culture that encourages school districts from Poway to the East Bay to be deceptive about the long-term costs of school bonds.